Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Student Response Systems Presentation Final
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Student Response Systems Presentation Final

1,835
views

Published on

Presentation created for Harrisburg University class, March 2010.

Presentation created for Harrisburg University class, March 2010.

Published in: Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,835
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
41
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Graphics: SR devices – new styleInfo: title page
  • Graphics: question mark or similar replaced by hand, other srsSlide Text:noneNarration: How many people have used SRS? (Show several examples)
  • Graphics: SR devices – new styleSlide Text: objectives of presentation:Description & purposehistoryhow they workHow they are being used in various venuesComparisons of popular models and Web-based alternativesConsiderations for purchaseBest practiceNarration: Go over objectives
  • Graphics: SR devices – new style pronunciation Slide Text: Definition of SRS (ARS, electronic voting system, personal response system, etc.) CLICKERS!Narration: definition, description“technology products combining software and hardware designed to support communication and interactivity in classes”
  • Graphics: SR devices – new style pronunciation Slide Text: Definition of SRS (ARS, electronic voting system, personal response system, etc.) CLICKERS!Narration: definition, description“technology products combining software and hardware designed to support communication and interactivity in classes” Beatty 2009any system used in a face-to-face setting to poll students and gather immediate feedback in response to questions posed by instructors” Deal, 2007
  • Graphics: SR devices – new styleSlide Text: Purpose of SRSMarzano quoteNarration:What has garnered all the attention?Idea of engagement Idea of formative assessment (Marzano 2003) ability to collect dataPrivate & anonymous answer
  • Graphics: SR devices – historical model from entertainment polling?Slide Text: History of SRS~ 1st GenerationMotion picture and advertising pollingNarration:Developed in the 40sUsed extensively in Hollywood –Audience Studies InstituteTv studios and ad agencies – gage effectiveness of their productsKnob - - left for dull, all the way to “great” on the rightLater, yes/noRequired hardwiringRice University – one of first to use – system required computers
  • Graphics: SR devices – Classtalk screen, then question cycleSlide Text: Classtalk ~ 1985Narration:First popular device in education designed by NASA engineerfunded by national science foundationUsed graphing calculators with MACs and a hard-wired networkEducationally sophisticated program and many featuresIncluded question cycle (graphic)Expensive – special networks had to be installed in each classroom – Replaced by simpler systems resembling tv remotes (infrared first) that lacked the educational features
  • Graphics: screen shot: pocket pc and routerSlide Text: Free Web-based alternativesColleges numina,class in handNarration:Late 90s – colleges first to have web-based wi-fi systemsUsed pocket pcs, laptops (profs) & windows mobile softwareNumina – U of NCClass in hand – wake forest
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: Radio frequencyInfraredWeb-basedNarration:Describe the 3 methods: first were RF, like TVs, next InfraredAlso – web basedWhy it mattersCapabilityrange
  • Graphics: fade in screen shotof question constructionSlide Text: See narrationNarration:Stand-alone function ~ for use with any applicationIntegration with OfficeOnline Textbooks (Glencoe, for example)Classroom management systems (blackboardOnline educational programs (Study island)
  • Graphics: feedback graphics from T TSlide Text: Poll resultsReportsActual slidesNarration:Poll – immediate feedback; systems vary in how this can be reported – list by device numbers or student names, etc as well as agregateReports – software based display or directly to excel; others export to excel
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: Research and Observation: IndustryNarration:What comes around goes around – started in industry, continues to be a valued tool for many of the same reasons (review); esp entertainmentAppeal: same things that appeal to education: keep audience engaged, feedback from everyone in a meeting or a training as input and assessmentease of transport
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: Research and observation from: Higher EducationSRS website from U of W http://www4.uwm.edu/ltc/srs/Narration:Most prevalent in science educationSome proponents of the devicesU of Wisconsin – extensive studiesWhat the research saysFocus on overall attitude, student involvement, assessment & learningEarly research expresses some skepticism (Manna from heaven, 2005)55 colleges, 478 profs, 2777 students, 72 intro science coursesStudy showed that profs NOT utilizing innovative methods in general, although students found them helpfulUniversity of Wisconsin 2006 – more positive – 94% of profs found them valuable; 2668 students – 74% said they were beneficialData showed increase in student learning/performance; no increase is retentionMore recently – support from faculty and students (Kay and Knaack 2009)Students’ survey: easy to use, learn more (data supports this perception), like for formative assessment (checking understanding, test review); positive overall, liked least as testing tool; some students found the use of ARS stressful (unfamiliar)Teachers: engagement increases (some studies say attendance, also); effective for formative assessment
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: Research and observation: K-12Narration:Not as much research as in higher edWhat does exist – assessment studied more extensively than other usesPenuel study most comprehensive; many findings similar to those in higher ed
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: classroom environmentLearning, AssessmentNarration:Environment issues (anonymity -> participation)Learning – discussion, teachers modify on the fly, research shows connection with achievementAssessment – feedback for students and teachers, (improves learning, quality of teaching),
  • Graphics: comparison chart of popular toolsSlide Text: CostNarration:eInstruction (CPS)InterwriteH-ITTQuizdomTurning PointMost make different levels of systemsSome have LCD displaysIntegration options vary – including some that integrate with specific iwb softwareIWB:SmartPrometheanPolyvision uses Quizdom
  • Graphics: screen shot: polleverywhere; link to video?Slide Text: Free Web-based alternativesPoll EverywhereMobiOdeNarration:Poll Everywhere ~Free for 30 usersMobiode – freevesion allows for one open survey
  • Graphics: not sure yetSlide Text: Level of functioningIntegrationwith applications and softwareDataCostNarration:Manufacturers make different systems with various capabilities – simple mulitple choice to full keyboards and equationsMost integrate with other software; PPT and Other Office products (some Keynote) and Study Island, Accelerated Reader, Textbook companiesEducation week article about the future of digital textbooks; 4 dominant companies; what deals will be made?Most have ability to register answers independently of other software, and collect and save dataCost differences based mostly on capabilitiesRF vs infraredMultiple choice vs text abilityIWB-based somewhat more expensive
  • Graphics: not sure yetSlide Text: UsersAudienceTeachersNarration:Teacher and student characteristics impact use, and selection of devicesTeachers – new role in classroom (if using beyond F assessment)Comfort with technology, and troubleshootingStudents – age and grade; some students are stressed by it(cite studies for these?)
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: Best PracticesLink to SRS siteNarrationGood teaching practices!Training increases frequency of use by teachers! Introduce to students; use practice runAllow time for setting up and testing questions and devices, managing devices in the classroomUse class roster and report capapbilities
  • Graphics: SR devices in actionSlide Text: Best PracticesLink to SRS siteNarration (continued)Don’t use for attendanceDon’t use for high-stakes assessmentUse frequently throughout course or unit (truly integrate)Don’t over use in any lesson (a few questions, every 15-20 minutes or so)Use answers to pace/modify the lesson
  • Graphics: screen shot: unsureSlide Text: Power of the tool dependent on good teaching practicesPotential for increasing student achievementFuture most secure in K-12 educationFree Web-based and mobile alternatives will surge first in higher edNarration:Power of the tool dependent on good teaching practices – response systems fully integrated into lesson, use of effective questions; classroom not teacher-centricPotential for increasing student achievement – shown in research and surveys done in k-12 and higher ed; also marzanoFuture most secure in K-12 educationFree Web-based and mobile alternatives will surge first in higher ed and industry
  • Transcript

    • 1. Student Response Systems
      LTMS 510
      Susan Miller
    • 2. Question
      How many of you have used a student
      response system?
    • 3. Objectives
      Description and purpose
      History
      How they work
      Implementation
      Benefits
      Leading tools and Web 2.0 options
      Considerations
      Best practice
    • 4. Student Response Systems
      Audience Response System
      Personal Response System
      CLICKERS!
      Classroom Communication System
      Electronic Voting System
      Classroom Response System
    • 5. Student Response Systems
      “any system used in a face-to-face setting to poll students and gather immediate feedback in response to questions posed by instructors” ~ Deal, 2007
      “technology products – combinations of software and hardware – designed to support communication and interactivity in classes” ~ Beatty, 2009
    • 6. Purpose
      Engagement
      Collect data
      Formative assessment
      “Three features inherent in interactive white boards have a statistically significant relationship with student achievement. The first is the learner-response device. Using voting devices was associated with a 26 percentile point gain in student achievement.” ~ Robert Marzano, 2009.
    • 7. History ~ 1st generation
      Hollywood and advertising polling
      1940s
      Audience Studies Institute
      Used knob; later ‘yes’ and ‘no’
      University adoption
      1960s
      Rice
      Stanford
      Hard wiring and computers
    • 8. History ~ 2nd generation
      Classtalk ~1985
      1st device popular in higher education
      Funded by National Science Foundation
      Strong grounding in instruction
      1990s
      eInstruction, Educue
      New systems easier
      to use
      “Clickers”
    • 9. College Wi-Fi systems
      laptops and Pocket PCs with Windows Mobile software
      Project Numina and Numina II, U. of North Carolina (1999)
      Class in Hand, Wake Forest U (2001-2003)
      3rd Generation – Web-Based
    • 10. How they work ~ Hardware
      Signal
      Radio frequency
      Infrared
      Web-based
      Hub
      Devices
    • 11. Software
      Stand-alone function ~ for use with any application
      Integration with
      Office
      Online Textbooks
      Classroom management systems
      Online educational programs
    • 12. Poll results
      Reports
      Data
    • 13. Continues to be a valuable tool
      Entertainment
      Meetings
      Engagement
      Collect large amount of data
      quickly
      Portability
      Industry
    • 14. Higher Education
      Most prevalent in math, and medical & other sciences
      Most common usage:
      Assessment (formative, diagnostic, summative)
      Student engagement
      Share feedback
      Discussion-starter
      Increasingly positive findings
      Universities leading the way
      University of Wisconsin
    • 15. K~12 Education
      Usage mirrors higher education
      Assessment
      Engagement
      Feedback
      Discussion
      Prepare for standardized tests
      Provide instructional
      variety
    • 16. Benefits
      Classroom environment:
      Positive affect on attention, engagement, participation and attendance
      Anonymity
      Learning:
      Discussion
      Modification
      Achievement
      Assessment:
      Regular feedback
      Teacher and student
    • 17. eInstruction (CPS)
      Interwrite
      H-ITT
      Quizdom
      Turning Point
      IWB-specific
      Popular Systems
    • 18. Poll Everywhere
      MobiOde
      Web-Based Options
    • 19. Considerations ~ Software and Hardware
      Level of functioning
      Integration
      Data management
      Cost
    • 20. Considerations ~ The Users
      Instructors
      Familiarity with technology
      Flexibility
      Interactive white boards
      Audience
      Age
      Adaptability
      Attitude about
      monitoring
    • 21. Best Practice
      Successful use dependent on good teaching /questioning practice!
      Instructor training
      Audience understanding of use, problem-solving
      Allow time for design and use
      Use class roster and
      reports
    • 22. Do not use for attendance-taking
      Avoid high-stakes assessment
      Use frequently throughout a course or unit
      Do not over-use within a lesson
      Use answers to pace the class
      Best Practice
    • 23. Conclusions
      Power of the tool dependent on good teaching practices
      Potential for increasing student achievement
      Future most secure in K-12 education
    • 24. References
      (2008). What Do Wireless Response Systems Cost?. T+D, 62(6), 88. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
      Adams, H., & Howard, L. (2009). Clever Clickers: Using Audience Response Systems in the Classroom. Library Media Connection, 28(2), 54-56. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
      Beatty, I. (2004, February 3). Transforming student learning with classroom communication systems. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin, 2004(3), 1-13. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu /‌ir/‌library/‌pdf/‌ERB0403.pdf
      Beckert, T., Fauth, E., & Olsen, K. (2009). Clicker Satisfaction for Students in Human Development: Differences for Class Type, Prior Exposure, and Student Talkativity. North American Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 599-611. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
    • 25. References
      Cain, J., & Robinson, E. (2008). A Primer on Audience Response Systems: Current Applications and Future Considerations. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(4), 1-6. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
      Deal, A. (2007, November). Classroom response systems [White paper]. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from Carengie Mellon University website: http://www.cmu.edu/‌teaching/‌resources /‌PublicationsArchives/‌ StudiesWhitepapers/‌ClassroomResponse_Nov07.pdf
      Dufresne, R. J., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., Mestre, J. P., & Laura, W. (1996). Classtalk: A classroom communication system for active learning. In Better education inc. Retrieved March 16, 2010, from http://www.bedu.com/‌Publications/‌UMASS.html
      Edens, K. (2008). The Interaction of Pedagogical Approach, Gender, Self-Regulation, and Goal Orientation Using Student Response System Technology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 161-177. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
    • 26. References
      EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2005, May 15). Seven things you should know about clickers [Educause learning Initiavie]. Retrieved March 19, 2010, from http://www.educause.edu/‌ELI/‌7ThingsYouShouldKnowAboutClick/‌156805
      Ferriter, W. (2009). Student Responders: Feedback at Their Fingertips. Educational Leadership, 67(3), 83-84. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
      Jay, H., Jensen, M., & Moore, R. (2005, July/‌August). Manna from heaven or clickers from hell? Journal of College Science Teaching, 34(7), 36-39. Retrieved from http://ctl.stanford.edu/‌PRS/‌Hatch_Jensen_Moore_PRS _College_Bio.pdf
      Kay, R., & Knaack, L. (2009). Exploring the Use of Audience Response Systems in Secondary School Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 18(5), 382-392. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9153-7.
    • 27. References
      Kay, R., & LeSage, A. (2009). Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 53(3), 819-827. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.001.
      Keller, C., Finkelstein, N., Perkins, K., Pollock, S., Turpen, C., & Dubson, M. (2007). Research-based Practices For Effective Clicker Use. AIP Conference Proceedings, 951(1), 128-131. doi:10.1063/1.2820913.
      LaRose, J. (2009). Engage Your Audience. Professional Safety, 54(6), 58-62. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
      Marzano, R. (2009). Teaching with Interactive Whiteboards. Educational Leadership, 67(3), 80-82. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
    • 28. References
      Penuel, W., Boscardin, C., Masyn, K., & Crawford, V. (2007). Teaching with student response systems in elementary and secondary education settings: A survey study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 55(4), 315-346. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9023-4.
      Student response systems (SRS). (2010). University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Retrieved March 6, 2010, from http://www4.uwm.edu/‌ltc/‌srs/
      Photos:
      Classtalk: http://www.bedu.com
      Turning Technologies: http://www.turningtechnologies.com
      eInstruction: http://www.einstruction.com/
      Poll Everywhere: http://www.polleverywhere.com
      Responders in public schools: http://www.nytimes.com
      Responders in industry and higher education: AP Photo and http://www.gettyimages.com

    ×